radarr_update_collections

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description explicitly states it is a WRITE operation and modifies the Radarr instance, which goes slightly beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint: false). However, it does not detail any specific side effects, permissions, or destructiveness, though destructiveHint: false is consistent. The value added is marginal.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise and front-loaded: one sentence for purpose and one for warning. Both sentences are relevant and impactful, with no filler or redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool modifies collections but provides no context about which collections, what fields can be updated, or any prerequisites. The generic body parameter and lack of parameter documentation leave the description incomplete for correct usage, even though an output schema exists.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has a single 'body' parameter with no property descriptions (0% coverage), and the description does not compensate by explaining what fields or structure are expected. This is a critical gap for a tool that updates collections, leaving the agent completely in the dark about how to invoke it correctly.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action ('Update') and resource ('movie collections'), clearly indicating the tool's purpose. However, it does not distinguish from the sibling tool 'radarr_update_collection' (singular), leaving ambiguity about whether it updates all collections or specific ones.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'radarr_get_collection' or 'radarr_update_collection'. The WRITE warning is behavioral, not usage context, so the description offers no decision-making help.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.